Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sainik School, Manasbal


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus.  JGHowes   talk  22:42, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Sainik School, Manasbal

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG The Banner  talk 01:15, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:22, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:22, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:22, 29 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. Uninformed, arbitrary nomination of one of many Sainik Schools articles – see Category:Sainik schools. Eissink (talk) 21:38, 29 August 2020 (UTC).
 * Every article is judged on its own merits... The Banner  talk 23:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article as written does not meet GNG or NSCHOOL and no better sources have been found. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe you should learn to search better, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus, because I have just been able to add recent info based on three different RS and there is a lot more to be found. Eissink (talk) 11:07, 2 September 2020 (UTC).
 * Nope, I saw the but they are WP:TRIVIAL coverage. Seriously, "school budget was approved" is not even WP:NOTNEWS. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't agree. The year's budget is highly indicative of the standing of the school; a yearly budget of approx. 90 million US dollar is quite a sum, and the extension of facilities and programs shows that the school is not some local little school too. All information is dated, it is easy to refer to NOTNEWS in nearly every article. And the subject certainly meets GNG. Eissink (talk) 11:23, 2 September 2020 (UTC).
 * The school is one of some 33 Sainik Schools in India, and this one would be the only one not notable? This DR doesn't make sense, even if the article could be better. Eissink (talk) 11:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC).
 * Fair point. Maybe we need to delete some of the others too. Spiderone  10:45, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe you think your cynicism is funny, but it's not, and it isn't constructive either, so stop it. Eissink (talk) 12:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC).
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a poor reason for keeping an article Spiderone  12:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - as per WP:NSCHOOL, schools are not inherently notable and need to pass WP:GNG; this school doesn't pass Spiderone  10:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Could you be a bit more specific? Saying "doesn't pass GNG" is so easy. I mean, the "topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", so it basically passes GNG, so what do you mean? I hope the closing admin is more consciëntious than the contributions I've seen so far on this page. Eissink (talk) 12:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC).
 * The coverage is all routine and insignificant; the first two refs are not reliable at all and the other three are secondary sources but the coverage is run-of-the-mill Spiderone  12:17, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * One could name all but the highest quality scientific editions "routine, insignificant and run-of-the-mill", but I don't agree. Even the three given newspaper sources separately contain valuable information about a considerable army school, one of two of the kind in the whole of Jammu & Kashmir. You may find it all insignificant, I don't, and we're not even only here for ourselves. I don't get why some people think we should hunt eight year old articles, even after they have been improved. Eissink (talk) 12:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC).


 * Keep Per the existence of sources like, and . The standard for sourcing required of secondary schools has historically been low (due to the legacy WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES). While the majority of secondary schools in India are non-notable, this is one of the exceptions. This is a boarding school of note having a very selective entrance process. The sourcing available here is much more than what is typically available for an Indian school. If we delete this, we may as well delete 95% of all existing Indian school articles as they have lesser sourcing available than here.
 * The delete votes thus far are based on a blind application of GNG without considering the context. – SD0001  (talk) 19:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Every article is judged on its own merits... The Banner  talk 23:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 23:27, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Agree with that context is important in applying GNG. Most other 26 Sainik schools have similar or lower sourcing available. However this school with an annual budget of nearly Rs. 9 crores (approx 1.2 million USD) is notable (sources confirming this). Roller26 (talk) 11:31, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * We still judge articles on their own merits, not on their context. And yes, the school has a bduget, just like every other school in the world. So having a budget says nothing towards notability. The same with facilities. Ow, and interestingly, their own website-domain is expired... But it still fails WP:GNG and WP:NSCHOOL The Banner  talk 12:07, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Context is important because India is a lower middle income country. Not all local and state level media have resources or need to maintain and update all their coverage on a proper website with index-able articles in non-English language. Even top media houses like Times of India routinely have expired links for couple of years old articles. Hence it's more than likely that significant coverage exists for such an institution in multiple local sources which are either not existing on web or at-least not easily Googlable. Having a significant budget (9 crore) for couple of hundred high school students shows the importance that Indian government gives to such an institute. Roller26 (talk) 13:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, context and budget says nothing about the notability of this subject. The Banner  talk</i> 13:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Improved article – I have improved the article considerably, based on a multitude of sources from no less than seven different media outlets. Those who are interested in the subject will no doubt be able to expand the article considerably, not only from the given sources, but from so far unmentioned sources also. I think I have shown that the subject is notable, by all means. Eissink (talk) 18:57, 10 September 2020 (UTC).
 * Yes, you have indeed added more trivia. It still fails the notability guidelines. The Banner  <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 19:35, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The cosmos consists of trivia, might as well delete the entire Wikipedia. I hope, and expect, the sysop that closes this request does not agree with your interpretation of the notability guidelines. Eissink (talk) 19:46, 10 September 2020 (UTC).

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Per . The ariticle is well sourced, notable one of its kind in Kashmir Valley.  Mehra j Mir  (talk) 15:33, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   16:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per WP:NSCHOOL / WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES this article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NORG. WP:BEFORE revealed only routine run of the mill coverage and brief mentions, nothing that meets WP:SIGCOV which addresses the subject directly and in depth and is an WP:IS. The Keep votes do not list any sources that demonstrate notability and much the Keep argument is OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. <span style="font-family:Courier New, Courier, monospace;"> // Timothy ::  talk  00:49, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * This is nothing but a parade of shortcuts – have you read or even seen the article? There's an abundance of IS SIGCOV links given in the footnotes, addressing solely the subject. I can't believe this is happening – you don't expect me to list the sources here when I have clearly stated that the article was expanded from no less than seven different independent media sources, do you? Do you even appreciate what other editors are doing, TimothyBlue, or are you just giving this discussion half an eye and don't bother to read further than the first reactions ("much the Keep argument is OTHERSTUFFEXISTS" no, it isn't)? Eissink (talk) 01:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC).
 * And you have made the article into a parade of trivia. And trivia adds nothing to notability. The Banner  <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 19:59, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You may denounce my style, but the constituting information I provided is based on the significant coverage in [many] reliable sources that are independent of the subject. And, as I said before, there is more information to be found, not only in the wide range of sources that I have used, for anyone who may happen to be interested in the subject. Eissink (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2020 (UTC).


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.